Mancos Valley Resources

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841232547
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Mancos, CO, USA
Phone
9703944147
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Intergroup, Race Relations

Reported finances

Revenue
$306,608
Expenses
$169,214
Assets
$705,454
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kimberly Campbell (President)
  • Kelsea Ferrato (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dana Sprayberry-Thompson (Administrator): $21,949 total reported compensation
  • Kim Cox (Adminstrator): $14,708 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To Preserve and enhance the cultural, historical, recreational, educational and charitable assets of the Mancos Valley.

What it reported doing in 2025

Montezuma Youth Alliance involved at-risk youth in the following activities: Take 6 high school and middle school students to the Purgatory SOS program; provide a safe place for youth to be in the evenings (Teen Night); Take two youth ambassadors to a Tony Grampsas conference; provide Reading Buddies in collaboration with MPL and offer a Reading Buddies extension to include youth from 9 to 17 years old; execute a strategic planning meeting with SC; and provided a successful Skate Night series from May to November. In 2025, Montezuma Youth Alliance has seprated from MVR into its own organization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.3%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 68%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.17; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.3% of revenue deployed · 68% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 16 filed program accomplishments · $115K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.